{"id":242305,"date":"2021-12-25T16:36:21","date_gmt":"2021-12-25T11:06:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/?p=242305"},"modified":"2021-12-27T12:32:44","modified_gmt":"2021-12-27T07:02:44","slug":"covid-vaccination-returns-as-battleground-between-biden-administration-states","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/column-news\/covid-vaccination-returns-as-battleground-between-biden-administration-states\/","title":{"rendered":"Covid vaccination returns as battleground between Biden administration, states"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
By Kenneth Tiven in Washington<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Medical experts estimate<\/a> the USA could see a million new cases of Omicron Covid virus<\/strong> a day if the current surge rate of 50% keeps growing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The death rate is significantly less than for the Delta variant but again those who have not been vaccinated are more likely be seriously ill and ultimately dead.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the next few weeks, the US Supreme Court will take up the issue of President Joe Biden\u2019s ability to require vaccines for health-care workers at facilities that receive Medicare and Medicaid funding.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Unfortunately, the political identity war in America now demands a fight against vaccines and this is echoed by social media sites, conservative media and politicians trying to please their voters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n American states have the legal right to oppose federal regulation in court as we have seen on voting rights, abortion rights and now on issues of public health and safety. Some red state injunctions against this policy means the Administration is asking the Supreme Court to lift injunctions issued in lower federal courts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Biden administration argues<\/a> that federal law authorizes the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to condition federal funds on health care institutions meeting \u201crequirements\u201d in the interests of patients\u2019 \u201chealth and safety.\u201d Much of the opposition to vaccinations is couched as a religious belief.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Twice now, in two months, a six-justice majority has flicked away<\/a> claims from religious health care workers<\/a> who assert a First Amendment right to refuse vaccination against the coronavirus. A majority of the Supreme Court seems unlikely to find that religious liberty claims require a near blanket exemption to COVID vaccine mandates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, and there is always a however, three justices led by Neil Gorsuch, say there is a First Amendment right to refuse the vaccine on religious grounds<\/a>. They defend this position with rhetoric that undermines the constitutional foundation of all vaccine mandates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n With Justices Clarence Thomas and Sam Alito, this trio rejects the principle that preventing the spread of communicable diseases qualifies as an inherently compelling state interest. They see the religious angle as the wedge to accomplish this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For whatever reason Justices Kavanaugh and Barrett, the two latest Trump appointees, aren\u2019t in agreement. For now these two junior justices appear to be unwilling to exacerbate the pandemic in the name of religious liberty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Gorsuch\u2019s most alarming argument dismisses the notion that the government\u2019s interest in halting the spread of a lethal global virus is always compelling \u2018because a compelling interest \u201ccannot qualify as such forever.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n